H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 02:51 UTC
Gisela Dulko vs Michelle Larcher De Brito H2H: 0-1
Michelle Larcher De Brito holds a 1–0 lead over Gisela Dulko in their WTA head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Michelle Larcher De Brito leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Michelle Larcher De Brito won the 2008 Stanford third round 7-5 7-6(1).
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ARG
Age 41
Right-Handed
170 cm / 5'7"
H2H
0
–
1
1 main draw meetings
POR
Age 33
Right-Handed
165 cm / 5'5"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 17, 2008* | Stanford | WTA 500 | R32 | Hard | Michelle Larcher De Brito | 7-5 7-6(1) | Gisela Dulko | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gisela Dulko | #305 | #26 | 1,695 | 1,798 | 192 | 179 | 51.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Michelle Larcher De Brito | #1,216 | #76 | 821 | 1,630 | 30 | 42 | 41.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Gisela Dulko | Michelle Larcher De Brito | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2007 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #296 | 1,519 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2008 | 8–6 | 57.1% | #130 | 1,617 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 2001 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #188 | 1,488 | 0 | 0 | 2009 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #113 | 1,602 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 2002 | 4–3 | 57.1% | #154 | 1,528 | 0 | 0 | 2010 | 5–8 | 38.5% | #210 | 1,570 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 2003 | 5–7 | 41.7% | #125 | 1,516 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 19 | 2004 | 22–18 | 55.0% | #33 | 1,713 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 3–6 | 33.3% | #130 | 1,529 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2005 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #26 | 1,726 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 3–7 | 30.0% | #117 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2006 | 16–23 | 41.0% | #59 | 1,573 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #123 | 1,499 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2007 | 29–23 | 55.8% | #37 | 1,702 | 0 | 2 | 2015 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #226 | 1,531 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2008 | 18–20 | 47.4% | #51 | 1,658 | 0 | 3 | 2016 | 1–1 | 50.0% | #231 | 1,520 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2009 | 28–20 | 58.3% | #36 | 1,734 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 2010 | 21–21 | 50.0% | #48 | 1,686 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 2011 | 15–15 | 50.0% | #67 | 1,650 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 2012 | 2–5 | 28.6% | #305 | 1,604 | 0 | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |